Are you a great leader if your organization fails to meet expectations? Or if you aren’t meeting your goals, are you a great leader?
Carmelo Anthony and The Knicks
Today, the Wall Street Journal article Anthony: The Biggest (Playoff) Loser talked about Carmelo Anthony and his poor playoff performance. Carmelo Anthony traded to the New York Knicks NBA basketball team to bring a championship to New York.
The article states, “But considering the way Anthony’s teams have performed in the postseason, the Knicks would be lucky to even win a game.” It then explained that Anthony has played 50 career playoff games and has a record of 16-34. His winning percentage of .320 is “the worst of any player who has appeared in that many postseason games since 1991-92.”
Some people have said that he didn’t have a good supporting staff which led to his poor record. At the same time, his shooting percentage has been very poor in the playoffs. So, is he a good leader and the team has just been poor or is he a poor leader that has not helped his teams to succeed?
There are many leaders that go through a similar situation as Carmelo Anthony. They are hired into a new organization to turn it around quickly. As they start to change the organization, they are faced with many challenges. Some of those challenges come in the form of kickback from their employees, coworkers, superiors, or other people in key positions. Another challenge they may face is getting a company to drop old products and replace them with new ones. There are also many other challenges that they encounter.
As these leaders face challenges, they make progress toward goals, but it is slow progress. They are moving in the right direction, but the challenges don’t allow them to hit their goals as quickly as expected. Ultimately, even though they make progress, they are not able to reach their goals. They fall short of the expectations set when they came in.
So can leaders be great leaders if the organization fails or their initiatives aren’t successful? For leaders in this situation, I have seen two main arguments.
One argument is that when these leaders came into their position they knew what was expected of them, so they should be able to meet expectations. People will say that these leaders just can’t make things happen.
As for the argument that these leaders don’t have the right people around them to be successful, critics will say that since they are the leader they should fire the wrong people and hire the right people. Critics will say that they are the leader and should make it happen without excuses.
Others will say that these leaders were put in a bad situation from the beginning. Since they are making progress in the right direction, they are good leaders and should be given time to be successful. If these leaders are exhibiting characteristics of greatness, even though it may be slow, they should be allowed to stay in their position.
As for firing and hiring the right people, these leaders will not be as quick to take action. They will trust their employees and give them a chance to shine or fail before they fire them. If these leaders see potential in their employees, they will try to develop the potential rather than get rid of them.
What Do You Think?
So what do you think? Are these leaders poor or great leaders? Should these leaders be given a second chance because they are moving forward or should they be cut because they didn’t meet expectations? Please share your thoughts in the comments section below!